GRE作文范文 Argument-34

The following is a letter from an editor at Liber Publishing Company to the company's president.

嘉文博譯Sample Essay

"In recent years, Liber has unfortunately moved away from its original mission: to publish the works of regional small-town authors instead of those of big-city authors. Just last year, 90 percent of the novels we published were written by authors who maintain a residence in a big city. Although this change must have been intended to increase profits, it has obviously backfired, because Liber is now in serious financial trouble. The only way to address this problem is to return to our original mission. If we return to publishing only the works of regional small-town authors, our financial troubles will soon be resolved."

The writer in this argument is an editor claiming that Liber Publishing Company has moved away from its original mission of publishing the writing of regional small-town authors instead of big-city authors. As evidence, the editor states that authors who maintain a residence in a big city wrote ninety percent of the novels published by the company last year. The writer further claims that the change must have been intended to increase profits but that it has backfired as Liber is now in serious financial trouble. The writer concludes that the only way to fix the problem is to return to only publishing the works of regional small-town authors. This argument is full of weaknesses that should leave the president of Liber unconvinced.

The main problem with this argument is that one is left unsure of what exactly is the definition of “regional small-town authors.” The writer gives no clear definition and the only indication of what makes an author a regional small-town author is when he or she mentions that ninety percent of the novels published last year were written by authors who “maintain a residence in a big city”. It does make sense that authors who have been published would be able to afford a residence in a big city because they have already gained a certain level of success simply by having been published. Perhaps they actually live in a small-town but maintain a big city residence for business purposes for use during promotional appearances, etc. However, the editor fails to indicate whether the big city residences are these authors’ sole residences or whether they also maintain a residence in a small town, and whether that makes a difference in their individual categorization. If they also have a small-town residence, does this make them “regional small-town authors”? If a person was born and raised in New York City but moved to a small town in Oklahoma six months ago, does that make them a regional small-town author? The writer’s failure to define what exactly is a regional small-town author critically weakens this argument.

Moreover, the editor maintains that returning to publishing only the works of small-town regional authors is the only way to address Liber’s serious financial problems. Certainly there are other options available to the company to make it financially stable. It does not follow that simply returning to some idealistic mission will automatically lead to a solution to the company’s financial problems. What the company needs are profits – through publishing books that sell well regardless of whether the author is from a small town or a big city, or by reducing costs so that current revenue is enough to maintain a profit. Profitability is not directly tied to whether the company publishes only works by regional small-town authors - in fact, that would appear to be a sure way to further reduce profitability by restricting the scope of the company’s business. Stating that publishing only regional small-town authors is the only way to address the company’s financial problems further weakens the argument.

In summary, the editor’s argument ultimately fails because there is no basis in fact for his or her conclusion. To make the argument stronger and more believable, the editor should present direct evidence that the company has lost sales by moving away from its original mission. The writer must also prove that there is a sufficient market available to the company for selling regional small-town authors’ works that would actually resolve the financial troubles of Liber Publishing Company.

(593 words)

參考譯文

下述文字摘自Liber出版公司的一位編輯致公司總裁的一封信函：

在最近幾年中，Liber公司已經(jīng)很不幸地背離了它原初的使命：出版和發(fā)行地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品，而非大都市作家的作品。僅在去年我們所出版的小說中，有90%是由那些在大城市中維持居住狀況的作家創(chuàng)作的。盡管這一變化旨在增加盈利，但它顯然適得其反，因?yàn)長(zhǎng)iber公司現(xiàn)已陷入嚴(yán)重的財(cái)務(wù)危機(jī)。解決這一問題的唯一途徑是回歸到我們?cè)醯氖姑?。如果我們重新開始只出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品，我們的財(cái)務(wù)麻煩便會(huì)很快迎刃而解。”

本項(xiàng)論述的作者是位編輯，據(jù)他宣稱，Liber出版公司背離了其原初只出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家而非大城市作家作品的使命。作為證據(jù)，這位編輯陳述道，在大城市居住的作家所創(chuàng)作的作品占到了該出版公司去年一年中所出版的小說總數(shù)的90%。這位作者進(jìn)一步宣稱，這一變化雖意欲增加公司的利潤(rùn)但卻適得其反，因?yàn)長(zhǎng)iber公司現(xiàn)在已陷入嚴(yán)重的財(cái)務(wù)危機(jī)。這位作者最后的結(jié)論是，解決這一問題的唯一方法是重返只出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品這條老路上去。這一論述中充斥著種種薄弱之處，不足以使Liber出版公司的總裁信服。

這項(xiàng)論述的主要問題在于，我們無(wú)法確切地知道何謂“地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家”。作者沒有給出明晰的定義，而唯一能表明一位作家何以是一位地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的地方是當(dāng)這位作者(或論是他還是她)提及，去年所出版的小說中，有90%是由那些在“大城市中維持居住狀況的”作家創(chuàng)作的。我們的理解是，那些出版過作品的作家應(yīng)該有足夠的經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力在大城市中居住和生活，因?yàn)榧兇馔ㄟ^出版作品他(她)們?cè)缇瞳@得了一定程度上的成功?；蛟S，他們實(shí)際上居住在小鎮(zhèn)上，但卻出于商業(yè)目的而維持一種大城市的居住狀態(tài)，例如用于出版物促銷期間在公眾面前露面，等等。然則，這位編輯沒能明確指出，在大城市的寓所是否是這些作家唯一的寓所，還是說這些作家也在小鎮(zhèn)上維持居住狀態(tài)，還是說這一點(diǎn)在這些作家各自的范疇劃分中果真有所差異。如果他們也擁有一處小鎮(zhèn)寓所，這能使他們成為“地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家”嗎?如果有一個(gè)人出生于紐約市但在6個(gè)月前移居到俄克拉何馬州的一座小鎮(zhèn)，這是否能使他成為一個(gè)地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家呢?作者由于沒能確切地對(duì)何為“地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家”進(jìn)行定義，故嚴(yán)重地削弱了其論點(diǎn)。

此外，這位編輯堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為，回到僅出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品這條老路是解決Liber出版公司嚴(yán)重財(cái)政問題的唯一出路。勿容置疑，對(duì)于該公司來(lái)說，不乏其它一些選擇途徑來(lái)使它在財(cái)政方面保持穩(wěn)定。僅僅回歸到某種理想主義式的使命就能自然而然地導(dǎo)致公司財(cái)政問題的解決，這并不合乎邏輯。該公司真正需要的是利潤(rùn)——或者是通過出版那些能夠暢銷的書，不管其作者來(lái)自一座小鎮(zhèn)還是來(lái)自一座大都市;或者是通過減縮成本，以便使目前的收益足以來(lái)維持一定的利潤(rùn)水平。盈利能力與該公司是否僅出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品并不直接相關(guān)。事實(shí)上，限制公司的業(yè)務(wù)范圍，這似乎肯定會(huì)進(jìn)一步降低該公司的盈利能力。作者所作的陳述，即僅出版地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品是解決公司財(cái)政問題的唯一出路，進(jìn)一步削弱了其所作的論述。

歸納而言，這位編輯的論述最終無(wú)法站得住腳，因?yàn)闆]有任何事實(shí)依據(jù)來(lái)支持其結(jié)論。若要使其論點(diǎn)更具力度且更為可信，這位編輯應(yīng)該擺出直接的證據(jù)來(lái)證明，他(或她)所在的公司是因?yàn)槠x了其原初的使命而導(dǎo)致銷售下降的。這位作者還必須證明，對(duì)于該公司而言，存在著一個(gè)足夠大的市場(chǎng)，以銷售那些可在實(shí)際上解決Liber出版公司財(cái)政困境的地方性小鎮(zhèn)作家的作品。